Should Hidden Path Ent. create "Halo: Defense"?

[Threadshadow]

Hello,

Thought I'd transfer this topic from GameFAQs to here. Thanks for a fun game.

---------------
Hidden Path Entertainment created the XBLA game Defense Grid(fun game btw).

I was wondering what other genres would suit Halo. Halo Wars was RTS, and then I thought about the tower defense genre.

Should 343 Industries hire Hidden Path to create a Halo Defense game...one where the concept/action is more realistic? I mean, in reality enemies wouldn't line up and take millions of bullets as they marched single file to and from your power cores.

How do you change tower defense without changing tower defense?

The Covenant would have to be stealing something, right? Energy cores, forerunner components, pieces of your A.I construct...

Then there's the reason as to why the UNSC is stuck using UNSC defense structures instead of marines, vehicles, and Spartans...

Imagine calling down the MAC canon on a troop of poor covenant.

Hhmmm...Hidden Path is going to release a Portal dlc for Defense Grid so I guess anything is possible. It's just, would Halo Defense work?

next poster: "Halo Wars worked. Why not a TD."

next poster: "I can't understand why you wouldn't be fighting the Flood... If any enemy ever screamed: "Put me in a corridor with Flamethrowers on each side!" it would be the Flood!

But yeah, cool topic, completely agree."

^ Hey, I forgot about the Flood,...you're right, they would be great Tower Defense fodder. They'd be an easier explanation then Covenant forces too...but I wouldn't want it to be only Flood.

gave me another idea. Typical tower defense in the Halo world would work best against the Flood, with the player being a Halo custodian like 343 GS, and the towers being various Forerunner tech "growing" out of the Halo installation.

As for goals for the Covenant I thought maybe it could appear as various things. Like UNSC has to protect survivors till the evac comes, so your "power cores" are now represented by people and can be captured or killed. And depending on the goal item the Covenant may or may not "backtrack"

You gave me another idea for UNSC vs Covenant would be a very open level. Covenant forces can walk anywhere on the map, take cover, and attack towers, with no locked pathway, and just the purpose of making it to the goal and maybe back again. That way for the Covenant it's a bit more realistc then just the pathway.

next poster: "Something about Halo enemies just mindlessly walking straight doesn't seem right."

^ You're right, but as he stated, the Flood fit the bill of tradional TD style enemies best, even though they too could be running all over the place.

Actual Covenant forces should move more freely about the "level" as I mentioned in my post above yours. I agree that Covenant forces locked to a traditional style path doesn't seem right. I mean it could work, but doesn't seem logical or "realistic".

I'm giving this topic an upgrade!

This topic was just upgraded to "red" level.

next poster: "Well, in the Halo canon it could fit in by saying after the Halo array was destroyed and the gravemind killed (the flood) what's left of the covenant and humans were still fighting in the outer colonies.

Brutes and grunts are pretty dumb, but the intelligence of the enemies shouldn't be an issue. If you've ever played a tower defense it's just kind of a given that the enemies walk in paths. Multiple paths that are up to the AI which way to go could be like legendary setting. Otherwise the humans could have put the enemies in a bottle necked situation, who knows.

It should also be stated out the flood was able to fit through cracks. It was capable of changing the environment of the entire planet, so yea the tower defense for that scenario would have to be an escape rather than defending off or so I think.

Good topic!!!"

I think story is important, but they would really need to nail the gameplay...I'm just not thinking that solid pathway structure would feel right...except in the Flood scenario.

I understand what you're saying about the Flood coming in from everywhere, but I think a defense situation would have to be fresh "brand-new" Fore-runner tech/installation defending itself from an initial Flood invasion,..so as to keep the Flood on set pathways (because they haven't altered the environment yet)..though that doesn't mean the Flood couldn't scamper up around on the walls etc, but the defenses would have to track them.

The Covenant would have to be free of traditional TD pathway gameplay imo...or else have so many multiple pathways, so well intergrated into the level/art, that it doesn't feel like they are on pathways.

Now , like you said having the Covenant come in traditional TD style would work, but I think it would just make a better game if they pushed it further.

Speaking of TD games. Defense Grid is one of the best imo, but Savage Moon on PSN has a cool option. They let you take over a tower and start using it yourself in FP style. I think that's a cool TD option.

Was anyone else expecting the towers in Defense Grid to have a third upgrade? I was...

[jeffpobst]

Thanks for sharing. We know the folks over at 343 and I'll let them know about your idea. I'm not sure I can predict what they'll think... but it's cool that so many people spent time thinking about this.

[chillgreg]

Or if 343 are aren't interested, you could always drop LucasArts a line...
hmmm...

[Threadshadow]

Thanks for the response!

One question that needs to be answered would be Halo Defense as what? Dlc for Defense Grid, or a new standalone title (downloadable or boxed)? There would be questions that only 343 could answer. Such as, would they want Halo content as dlc for an unrelated game? It's worked well for Valve. I never would have thought to match Portal with TD.

Then does 343 want Halo content that is Dlc only or XBLA only, or do they prefer to have every bit of Halo content boxed and on the shelf?

If the dlc route is taken, obviously you can't rewrite huge chunks of Defense Grids code. "Halo Defense" would have to conform to the style previously laid out by Defense Grid.

I think most of the ideas I'm presenting in the above posts hold more to a completely new game (whether XBLA or boxed). In that respect I think that's where TD style could be pushed even further. A fresh start to implement new ideas, experiment, see what works and what doesn't work.

Please don't get me wrong, traditional TD is a fun gameplay style, and Defense Grid is the best I've played. I'm not trying to get rid of set-pathway style TD, I'm just trying to think of a way to open it up, or the illusion that it's opened up. Just under the idea that; Covenant forces wouldn't walk a single path like that.

And just thinking about 'traditional TD' versus 'reinventing TD'. I think Halo Defense as Dlc for Defense Grid would mainly be a Forerunner A.I. construct (like 343 GS) defending it's Forerunner installation from a sudden Flood invasion. Brand new tech, versus an unforseen Flood invasion. The Flood would walk traditional pathways, while the A.I. construct ordered towers and defences to protect the goal.

Whereas if you started from scratch, you could incorporate new things like tower damage/repair, and first-person control of towers, and "open concept" levels that allow or seemingly allow enemies free range over the "level". To tell you the truth, when I imagine Halo Defense, I do imagine a mix of Halo Wars and Defense Grid. At least graphically.

Would Covenant forces work in traditional style TD, yes. The only reason it wouldn't feel quite right is the question; why are the Covenant marching in, in single file? So basically, story.....and sometimes story doesn't matter...it may just be about combining the fun elements of Halo with Hidden Paths skill at making fun TD!

Have a great weekend!

[jonathan8940]

this is great information in this post.

[Threadshadow]

Thinking about Covenant in traditional TD...in Defense Grid, when the Walkers come in with a group of the little aliens I can see that as Elites with a pack of Grunts! The flying aliens could be Banshees, Spirit landers, and Phantoms. The big aliens, that drop little aliens when they die, could be like taking down a Covenant Phantom, and troops are left behind to run for the goal. Since Jackals have energy shields they would be resistant to projectile style towers, so bring on the energy weapons! Elites have shields and active camo options too.

Thinking just in general. For UNSC towers specifically, you'd have missile towers, Gauss towers, chain-gun towers, Spartan Laser towers. As seen in Halo Wars and Reach, the UNSC has large field gun placements for base protection, anti-air, anti-vehicle, anti-personnel uses.

I can see different campaigns too. UNSC campaign, Forerunner Campaign, and Covenant Campaign. Different stories with the player controlling the different group. I'm not too keen on the idea of fighting UNSC when controlling the Forerunner installation and the Covenant, so I think the Forerunner campaign would fight Flood and maybe Covenant, whereas the Covenant campaign, would be about invading Forerunner installations and defending the positions they've taken. Defending from initial Forerunner defences i.e. Sentries etc..and then when they open up an "artifact" finding and releasing a dormant Flood group, then it would be about defending themselves against the Flood until they can escape. The Covenant could call down a "glassing" from a Covenant cruiser. This could all work traditionally or otherwise, but probably not as dlc for Defense Grid.

A couple questions come to mind. When is TD too simple, or too complex? How far can TD be pushed before it becomes RTS? On that subject Halo Wars was RTS, but RTS simplified, and accessable...would Halo Defense have to take this route too? TD is already simple , as in an 'it's easy to learn, hard to master' kinda way, so simplifying it any further isn't the question. Only 'how far can we push it', needs to be considered, imo.

[Threadshadow]

Idea for a couple more UNSC towers. Unconventional towers like Temporal, and Tesla towers etc. could be refered to as 'ONI' towers, since the Office of Naval Intelligence is always cooking up strange devices. How do they bend time in the Halo universe? ONI temporal towers use a modified FTL drive. Resource engineering towers or factories. Have a lot of resource towers but lose space for defensive towers etc..

Thinking about my question in my original post "why the UNSC is stuck using UNSC defense structures instead of marines, vehicles, and Spartans..."
I suddenly remembered 'Ninja Town' for Nintendo DS. I suppose other TDs use this method too, but anyway, you place a Ninja and he stays within a certain radius along the path and attacks everything that comes within his circle of influence. Upgrade and his circle gets bigger allowing him to move around further and attack sooner and longer.

Basically it's the same thing as towers having a larger firing range and area of effect, so it's just about graphical presentation. This would allow players to place "towers" that are actually entrenched UNSC marines/ODST, Spartans, and vehicles. They would move around and attack in their circle of influence etc...it just allows you to have more familiar Halo elements on the playing field.

One thing I've been thinking about is enemies attacking towers as they come in and pass by (whether tradional or what have you). Once damaged you need to repair or demolish them. In the case of the player being a Forerunner Monitor he'd have several 'engineer' Sentries at his disposal. The more Sentry engineers you send to a tower the faster it is repaired, or you can spread them out repairing more towers but at a slower pace. This would work with Covenant Engineers too.

[Threadshadow]

Finally played through "You Monster" Campaign, and I have to say that I liked those levels that featured 'open floor' pathways. The second level features one where the aliens just rush across the floor towards the goal and rush back. Great stuff seeing them rushing spread out like that, instead of single-file. Fun, and I think that's along the lines of how I see Halo Defence, at least when considering Covenant forces.

Scarabs would make great 'boss' characters, of course, but I'd like to see Locusts as well. Perhaps two kinds; an easier one with conventional weaponry, and the traditional one with the beam weapon-"building destroyers", but in this case, "tower destroyers".

Have a good week, everyone!

[Threadshadow]

I'm sorry everyone. I just played the demo for Savage Moon again, and you can't actually control the towers in first-person mode, you only look through the towers "camera".

I still think allowing the player to take complete control of any tower (moving to first-person) would be great. I also think that when a player controls a tower, that tower gets a stats boost while under direct control.

Exactly what would happen if the 'tower' you took control of was an entrenched group of soldiers, or vehicles, instead of a defense tower?

[Threadshadow]

PixelJunk: Monsters recently came to mind, especially how they have a little "hero" character for the player instead of a reticle.
What if Halo Defense had a "hero" character to help bring story to the player (in-game dialogue/cut-scenes). To Help achieve some emotional attatchment. A human hero- maybe a Spartan, but I'm thinking more along the lines of John Forge (once again, Halo Wars.). A Covenant campaign would feature a high ranking Elite (a prophet in a floating chair?), Chieftan? The Forerunner campaign would be the Monitor of the installation.

This character would be able to help. I'm thinking that once waves start, the player can actually attack with the hero character instead of just staying out of the way. The hero character would move around, help, attack all in the regular view of the level (no jumping into direct 3rd-person view or 1st-person needed.).

Here's the trouble with this idea. I like the idea of a hero character, but that really slows down movement on the map for the player. The speed of the reticle is so much better. Is there a solution to this? Hero for some aspects of play, reticle for others?

Perhaps this would just be throwing one too many wrenches into the machine...

Speaking of cut-scenes! I can imagine them playing out like the cut-scenes in, once again, Halo Wars!

Have a great weekend everyone!

[Threadshadow]

Thinking about a "hero" character again. If the player can jump back and forth quickly from hero to reticle then A.I. would control the hero character while the player is using the reticle. Would the player then have RTS style commands to set for the hero for the AI to obey-so the AI wouldn't get the hero killed?
So the hero is like a tower that moves around the map and attacks. If the hero character gets "killed" the player needs a larger then average amount of resources to revive it. And just like upgrading a tower, the hero character should have a couple levels of upgrades, but at a higher cost then upgrading towers.(the hero upgrades could potentially reset on every new level.) Or if they cost a lot perhaps they should stick around for the tougher levels.

Naturally when the player controls the hero, the hero does better (depending on the skill of the player), should the hero receive a stat boost under player control? Towers should receive a stat boost under player control. Skill of the player determines accuracy.

I wonder if commands for towers are worthwhile. Player instructs tower to always shoot lead enemy, most powerful enemy, etc..or not shoot during a certain wave??? I just thought of something...what if firing a weapon used tiny amounts of resources? A tower that had no effect on certain enemies could be instructed not to shoot thus saving resources. Though in that situation what's to stop the player from selling that tower and building an effective one? It's an idea.

[Threadshadow]

I was thinking about the "upgradable hero character" again. What if besides stat boosting upgrades it also had vehicle "upgrades". He starts out on foot with a weapon, but in the seperate catagory, if you're willing to spend the resources you can upgrade him into a Warthog, and eventually into a Scorpion tank. I'm not sure about this of course, but it's just an idea.

Somehow I see the Warthog, and I imagine a twin stick shooter!

[Threadshadow]

Just thinking of scenarios. UNSC VS. Covenant/Flood/Forerunner-?. Forerunner VS. Covenant/Flood. Covenant VS Forerunner/Flood/UNSC. I was also think Covenant VS. Covenant. A scenario that takes place post Halo 3, where its Elites VS. Brutes, and each has the full spectrum of Covenant forces to pull from. I think that scenario would work great for some type of 2-player VS mode too (defense/attack type gameplay) Each player is defending against and attacking the other player.

[Threadshadow]

I hate to be so derivative, but I recently played a bit of "Anomally: Warzone Earth" and well....they're idea of "Tower Offense" would be a great inclusion in a Halo Defense game. It's perfect for when you are moving your forces to a new location. The convoy survives, secures the area and then you set up for the more regular defense. You could have one-two deffense levels and then an offense level to get to your next defense levels. The move could take any number of scenerios. moving ground forces, escorting missions, taking survivors to an LZ then defending that LZ so they can make a safe escape, and even using air-based forces. Example: a fleet of hornets, falcons, pelicans, and a vulture or two sweep in by air to deal "massive damage" to an enemy stronghold, then set up for defense.

Mixing the levels from defense to offense and back would add nice variety to the gameplay while keeping it coherent and really adding help to the story-telling aspect.

once again, sorry to be so derivative but it seems an excellent fit.